Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Hosterman stated that she would like to stay with the Planning Commission's <br />recommendations. <br /> <br /> Due to lack of a second on the motion as moved by Ms. Hosterman, the motion <br />died. <br /> <br /> A new motion was moved by Ms. Ayala, seconded by Mr. Campbell, making <br />the f'mding that the proposed modification of the existing PUD development plan <br />substantially conforms to PUD-01, and introduced Ordinance No. 1897, to be read <br />by title only and waiving further reading thereof, approving PUD-01-3M subject to <br />"Exhibit B," Conditions of Approval with a modification to Condition 43 to include <br />the same Green Building Measures previously approved in the Heinz project with <br />encouragement to reach the goal of 50 points. <br /> <br />The roil call vote was taken as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers -Ayala, Campell and Mayor Pico <br />NOES: Councflmember Hosterman <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: Councilmcmber Brozosky <br /> <br />There was a break at 9:00 p.m. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Campbell reconvened the meeting at 9:07 p.m. because Mayor <br />Pico recused himself from participating on this issue because he owns property in the <br />downtown. <br /> <br />Mr. Swirl presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift pointed out that there was a minor modification to the Downtown <br />Parking Ordinance, which was outlined in a memorandum provided to Council. The <br />matter involved the provision of Section 18.88.020(D)(2) which would give parking <br />credits for the existing floor area for those buildings approved for demolition where the <br />replacement building would have the same or better architectural style as the original <br />building, as determined by the approving body. It was noted that as currently drafted, <br />this parking credit would not apply to a replacement building, which results from a fire, <br />earthquake, or other calamity. After staff discussed the matter with Peter MacDonald, <br />Chair of the Pleasanton Downtown Association Parking Committee, it was agreed that <br />this was an oversight and that there was no intention of treating buildings destroyed by <br />fire differently from those demolished. Therefore, staff proposed the minor changes to <br />the draft ordinance, which they regard as clarifications and not substantive changes. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 10/07/03 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />